Some “experts” have decided that (a) the earth is warming, (b) it’s warming in addition to normal periodic warm/cool cycles, (c) humans are causing this supposed warming (anthropogenic global warming — AGW), (d) the net effect of supposed warming is bad and should be stopped, and (e) placing limits on human productivity is better than allowing human productivity to flourish so that humans can deal with the supposed coming warming. The stakes are high: politicians are to severely cripple human productivity by forcing people to shut down the motors of the human world to avoid the supposed “catastrophe” of raising the earth’s temperature a few degrees.

The boisterous environmental groups have preached to the man on the street for years on the dangers of AGW. Based on the media coverage, one could easily assume that there exists an overwhelming group of impartial “experts” who all agree that AGW is poised to ruin life on earth if humans are not stopped immediately. This proselytizing of the voting public has whipped the issue in to a full frenzy. Yet few people of the voting public (or the media) have cracked one book or read one paper about why these conclusions are being fed. Simply ask people why they believe in AGW, and they’ll refer to media reports of the “experts” or the boisterous non-scientist politician Al Gore.

Since the “experts” reversed their predictions from the next ice age in the 1970s, the political anthropogenic global warming (AGW) movement has gained traction and now appears to be stronger than ever, with traditional allies of reason and sanity caving in to the dishonest hysteria–namely the republican president.

There is in fact no majority consensus of “experts” and the scientific papers that support various arguments (a-e above) have numerous counterparts that contradict their conclusions. If something is true, it cannot have contradictory evidence. Certainly, if politicians are going to push humanity back in to the caves, they would want to be sure that such a move is absolutely necessary, right?

It’s completely crazy that there is so much fervor in support of attacking human productivity with such flimsy evidence and unfounded conclusions.

There is something else going on, because it’s certainly not about the science.